BPA Lies

A new study on pet food found that dogs consuming a canned food lined with BPA – for just two weeks – absorbed the hormone altering drug into their system at alarming levels. One of the two foods tested, lied to the researchers and to TruthaboutPetFood.com.

A recently published pet food BPA study from multiple researchers at the University of Missouri found BPA – a commonly used chemical in the plastic lining of canned foods (human and pet) – in the blood and fecal samples of dogs after consuming one of two canned pet foods for only two weeks. “Two-week feeding of either canned dog food brand increased BPA levels in dogs.”

BPA is an “endocrine disruptor chemical”. From the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, an ‘endocrine disruptor chemical’ is: “Endocrine disruptors are chemicals that may interfere with the body’s endocrine system and produce adverse developmental, reproductive, neurological, and immune effects.”

The University of Missouri study collected blood and fecal samples of each dog prior to the study and after the two week period. Their results…

Pre-samples = 0.7 ng/mL

Post-samples = 2.2 ng/mL

In just two weeks, the dogs levels of “circulating BPA” increased three times that of levels prior to the study.

Dogs in the study were pets, in homes. Each family that participated agreed to using no plastic serving utensils and bowls (that could contain BPA) and agreed to limit or eliminate treats that were packaged in plastic. All of the dogs previous to the study consumed a kibble diet.

What two dog foods were used in this study? As common with scientific studies, we don’t know. But…we have clues with this one. The University of Missouri study stated pet food number one was chosen because the manufacturer openly admitted to researchers that BPA is included in the can lining (assuming it was an anonymous inquiry). Pet food number two was chosen because the manufacturer told researchers and TruthaboutPetFood.com their can did not include BPA in the lining. The study included a link to a 2010 post on this website ‘Which Pet Foods have BPA free cans?’

From that 2010 TAPF post we have the following list of pet food manufacturers that claimed their pet food cans are BPA free…

So…we don’t know who pet food number one was (the pet food that admitted to BPA in the can lining), but we can assume that researchers chose pet food number two from the list above.

What did the study find?

The study found all dogs contained high levels of BPA after just two weeks of consuming either food.

Analysis of the can linings showed both pet foods contained BPA and levels were “not significantly different”. In other words, the pet food that admitted to having BPA in the can lining tested to contain about the same level of BPA as the pet food that claimed their cans did not contain BPA.

Analysis of the actual pet food (within the can) of both dog foods also showed no significant difference; pet food number one and pet food number two contained about the same level of BPA in the actual food.

And because analysis found similar levels in the BPA concentrations in the can lining and foods of pet food one and pet food two, the researchers also found all dogs involved contained “similar internal concentrations of BPA … on Diets A and B”.

So we are left with…a pet food company that directly lied to researchers at University of Missouri, directly lied to TAPF, and more than likely has lied to thousands of consumers about a very serious issue – BPA.

What can consumers do?

There is no easy answer to this question. When pet food manufacturers learn what consumers do not want in their pet food (in this case BPA in the can lining), some of these companies will lie. There is little we can do about it, unless there is sound evidence of a lie (sound evidence would be test results).

If someone out there wins the lottery, they could start a pet food testing fund (and a legal defense fund because certainly those that are caught lying will fight back). But until this happens, we are left with having to trust our pet food manufacturer is telling us the truth.

Pet food manufacturers should be held accountable for their claims of BPA free, and regulatory authorities should enforce those claims just as they do other claims…such as human grade or Salmonella free raw pet food. Consumers certainly deserve some back-up from regulatory on the BPA issue…and yes, I will be asking them for that at the upcoming AAFCO meeting.

To read the abstract of the University of Missouri study, click here. To purchase the full report, same link.

Comment21

SK
Jan 06, 2017

Just fyi – I have called Fromm several times over the years to ask if their cat food cans are lined with BPA, because I used to feed my cat their dry food (I can’t any more because she’s now on that fake ‘prescription’ food for bladder stones, however to be fair, it did work to dissolve those stones… i don’t know what to make of that, but that’s another story), and the Fromm customer service people were ALWAYS very honest and up-front with me in telling me that yes, some of their cans *are* lined with BPA and they always explained to me precisely which size/product cans are and aren’t lined with BPA. So at least I can personally vouch for Fromm being honest about this.

Just my humble well researched opinion – Dry food is really bad for cats and is a contributor to disease. If my cat had a problem w/ stones, diabetes, thyroid, kidney, bladder, UTI I would no longer feed dry food.

I’ve also been told by companies several times that small cans (3 oz/5.5oz) do not have BPA in them because they are stamped from one piece of metal – that the big cans are the ones that need BPA due to the seam. Have you heard this?
Just had a conversation with a Nulo rep about this – they’ve seemed very transparent in our interactions so far. He was saying that they won’t claim no BPA in cans as even the places that say there’s no BPA there’s still trace amounts. I respected his honesty. Still, we’ve also been told by companies like Tiki and Weruva that they can have no BPA as they also manufacture the actual cans themselves and can choose to do it without BPA, unlike American companies that are forced to purchase and use the cans available to the market. Many tell me they’d choose to do BPA free in a second if it at all possible, but that there aren’t those sorts of choices available to them. Is this true? Anyone know anyone that could talk to someone in the can manufacturing industry that could tell us if this is true? What about Eden Organics and Muir Glenn for people food – they say they’re BPA free, but I once read that these claims might just mean they use other equally bad chemicals to do the same job. How do we know what’s true? Geez.
This is a tough issue as a pet supply store owner, as my inclination when I read this is to wipe out all canned foods, but I can’t imagine that announcement! (I already wish I could wipe out most or all kibble!) So many people rely on cans, and for cats, this is especially frustrating. It’s already such a priority for us to get cats off of dry foods and at least into cans due to the lack of starches/carbs needed and the tremendously important issue of moisture in a cat’s diet. So many cases of kidney disease and diabetes in cats that are largely preventable with diet. Hearing this news is no surprise, but it makes me so sad, as hyperthyroid disease is also so common – I really don’t want hormone disruptors to be part of that equation of course. We far prefer raw (which most people don’t realize is generally cheaper than cans) but cans have always been a good compromise customers are willing to make (mostly due to the mild inconvenience of having to remember to thaw raw) and cans are often better accepted by cats.
Of course wiping out all processed food isn’t practical and would be a tough sell to the public…

Not sure about what’s possible or not, but I do buy Go! brand canned cat food now (as a supplement/break from the ‘fake’ prescription canned food I have to feed my cat most of the time) and they claim no BPA lining, however Go! is a Canadian brand and I’m in Canada, so I”m not sure where they source their cans from, or how the manufacturing process might be different.

Not knowing what health challenges your pet is facing, I don’t know if they have what your pet needs, but I would highly recommend you call them & talk with them & find out. You might not need to be stuck feeding that crappy “prescription” food & able to get your pet on some real, true, nutrition, while still appropriate for whatever health condition your pet is dealing with.

The freeze dried raw is another option that if a consumer has the issue w/ the inconvenience of thawing, or the (for whatever their reason is) the ick, factor of the raw, that is then the 2nd best option (of course homeade is #1) but if their not willing g to feed commercial raw, then it’s doubtful they’ll make homeade.

The freeze-dried raw though, is a lot more expensive than the frozen raw. I once contacted a company about that, who said that the process & machinery they need to make the food freeze-dried, is a lengthier & most costly endeavor, which is who it’s more expensive. However, I still say if you are feeding a higher quality canned food, which of course, will have a higher price point as well, freeze dried will still be cheaper comparisonly better quality nutritionally, no BPA, yet still as convienant, or close to convienant as canned food. The few extra seconds it takes to crumble up the small cubes, then wash your hands (as it’s still raw food) then add some warmed filtered water & mix, isn’t a. It deal. It will however ,be a big deal (in a very good way) for your pet.

It should be noted, that your pet will eat less of this food because it is so nutrient dense, much higher in protien content & no grains or other carbohydrate load like peas, carrots, etc.

I use Primal dehydrated raw & think it’s a great product. By the way, not all dehydrated raw food is equal, read every label, nor will every one be palatable to every cat.

Some protien sources they like, some not. So, if anyone tries it & their cat/dog turns their nose up, it just might be they don’t like that particular protien . Just bring the bag back & try another. Also, rotating the protien sources is important & recommended. I buy a few different protien sources at same time & rotate throughout the week.

For one of two meals a day, I use a frozen raw food product that comes in 1 inch loose cubes. The bag is pulled out of the freezer, poured into a metal bowl, left overnight in the garage-fridge to pre-thaw, brought to room temp in the AM, and served. The empty bowl is soaked in very hot sudsy water, wiped clean with a paper towel, and rinsed. End of problem.

This is truly disturbing, not to know which cans have BPA – or not. Because of the moisture needed by cats, we usually feed raw if available. Otherwise feed Honest Kitchen which is only slightly dehydrated and rehydrated with warm water. HK does not come in cans. It usually has to be purchased by mail-order, in the US and Canada. Cats can be finicky eaters, but with time and enticements sprinkled on top, they will switch over. It seems to me that there must be flavor enhancements added to some canned cat foods, as our cats go nuts when they smell it. I’ve heard it called, “kitty crack”. This is another issue…

Sounds like the only thing people who love their pets can do is to learn how to make their pets’ food at home. Susan, I bought your excellent cookbook, but I need recipes for making large quantities at a time because I have a large sanctuary of 26 unadoptable cats. I find homes for the young and healthy. Are there recipes for making large batches ?

Now remember that most cans we also buy for human food have bpa in them too. So every time you buy even organic tomatoes in a can , you are putting bpa in your food too. I try to buy as little canned food as possible-even if I have to spend a bit more on boxes or bottles for the food (boxes I mean like for kidney beans or tomatoes not sure if it a true box they put it in).

I’m just curious as to why it took from 12-15 years to confirm that the BPA in the dog food actually shows up in the blood serum. Was there doubt as to whether dogs ingesting BPA-contaminated canned food would receive an acute or subacute dose from this exposure?

I’m simply a little disappointed that we would be publishing such obvious findings so many years after knowing the BPA migrated from the lining to the food substances and if there was scientifically-supported plausible denial for canine or feline health effects and/or if there was “push-back” by the pet food industry as to the earlier scientific findings. In corollary, how many dogs and cats have been exposed to harmful levels BPA from their canned foods since the earlier study that could or should have been prevented without having to wait for detailed pathology / blood chemistry morphology studies that were obviously not funded by NIH or FDA or the pet food companies? Is this a serious concern relative to other risks?

I have been told that even if a can isn’t lined with BPA, it will be lined with BPB. I have been told it must be lined with one or the other or the moisture from the wet food will most certainly degrade the tin can. Any thoughts on that?

i just emailed purina and got a reply (specially for Beyond Cat food 3 oz cans) – there are actually BPA in it, though the rep said its very safe…so i hope the author of this article will take note of it

[…] some downsides such as trace amounts of BPA or other hormone disrupting chemicals in their linings (regardless of what a company might claim )–it also takes a great deal of energy to create and then recycle these cans, as well as […]

[…] some downsides such as trace amounts of BPA or other hormone disrupting chemicals in their linings (regardless of what a company might claim ). It also takes a great deal of energy to create and then recycle these cans, as well as fossil […]

its all a con game going on with pet food manufacturers and human grade also for claiming their cans are BPA free…as they are now using BPS instead of BPA…BPS is just as harmful to the body as BPA….so theres no way u can win at this game unless u feed raw or make your owm…unfortuantely we all thought we can read a sigh of relief when reading that their product is bpa free…only to find out later what they use as a substitute could be equally or worse …sigh

How about New Zealand canned food like Ziwipeak and K9 Natural that stated explicitly on their website that their cans are BPA-free? Anyone know if the restriction on the use of BPA-lining is any stricter down under and in Europe? I am in the market for some canned food and found that NZ, German and British brands in general seem to have far less controversial ingredients like sodium selenite, carrageenan and other forms of gum in them than the usual WDJ-approved American brands.